Between godfather and godson: Contrition

Godfather, the dashing and unfazed symbol of bad faith and godson, the very epitome of the simpleton — it would be long yet before Nigeria produces another dysfunctional pair!

Hardball, of course, talks of former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan, and their latest hilarious news to hit the wire.

Godson Jonathan had dutifully written Godfather Obasanjo, intimating him of a certain Goodluck Jonathan Foundation; and seeking his blessing before he proceeds, in his new found fervour to “help humanity”. Not a bad idea; indeed perfectly African, where reverence for elders is high culture.

But what did the godfather do? He gratuitously replied, on the imperative of contriteness: “I have to commend you and your foundation, Goodluck Jonathan Foundation, for the faith you continue to have in Nigeria,” lectured the self-appointed father of modern Nigeria. “Maybe seeking how to be better and more serviceable to the nation and humanity is also a form of penitence and soul-searching to give conscience a relief and to show remorse.”

But remorse for what? Sure, Jonathan may well have a lot to atone for. His electioneering tactics of setting Christians against Muslims and ethnic baiting for contemptuous vote, for one. The residual bitterness and mischief would appear to be driving the current Biafra miasma.

Then, his utter failure to seize the moment, from a rare opportunity, and reshape Nigeria on the lines of structural sanity; preferring rather a fond opportunism at minority empire-building and regional irredentism, in a very fractious country, despite his controversial presidential emergence, which brazenly breached the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) zoning formula.

But even at his worst, Jonathan needs less contriteness than the Ebora Owu who, as usual, gratuitously tell others what he should be telling himself. To start with, Jonathan lost an election and conceded — whichever forces triggered his concession, he did. History will chalk him up right there, as perhaps the only good thing he did throughout that bitter and divisive election.

Obasanjo, at his best, would appear simply incapable of that, no thanks to his proudly proclaimed do-or-die political philosophy. In 2003, Obasanjo held a controversial election to keep him in power. In 2007, he staged the most brazen electoral heist in Nigerian history to impose both the late Umaru Yar’Adua and Goodluck Jonathan in that year’s PDP ticket. So bad was that election that Yar’Adua admitted his so-called election stank to high heavens and started processes to make amends.

Then, for the mischief of bringing on the peculiar pair of Yar’Adua and Jonathan (the one terminally ill; the other a near-vacuum) to satisfy Obasanjo’s grand delusion of ruling by remote control. Shouldn’t Baba Iyabo be apologising far more than anyone living or dead — with the possible exception of the Evil Genius at the hilltop of Minna?

And now, comparing apples with apples: why should Jonathan show contrition for wanting to launch a foundation after office? No matter Obasanjo’s annoying condescension, it is still, by miles, far more honourable than an Obasanjo, as sitting president, peddling illicit influence to build a so-called presidential library.

Instead of showing remorse as he is calling of Jonathan, the Aremu of Ota is busy flaunting the illicit proceeds from that enterprise. Jonathan is, therefore, the more honest guy here. At least whatever he wants to do, it is after office, without unfairly corralling anyone to some “donation”

Still, Jonathan and only Jonathan has himself to blame for the avoidable insults. He should have known Baba’s bad grace is second nature.

A person that you sent delegates to prostrate for during electioneering; and one who celebrated your electoral ouster with an unrestrained and frenetic dance in public, is unlikely not to pour ice-cold water on your post-presidential aspirations!